A leading candidate for the U.S. Senate in Montana has launched a digital advertising campaign targeting Flock Safety, the automated license plate recognition (ALPR) network widely deployed across the state. The campaign, characterized by sharp critiques of the technology, describes the cameras as "creepy as hell" and positions their removal as a key component of the candidate’s privacy-focused platform.
Flock Safety systems use AI to read license plates and track vehicle movements, creating a database of travel patterns that law enforcement agencies can search. The technology has expanded rapidly in Montana and other states, often marketed as a cost-effective tool for solving crimes and improving community safety. However, civil liberties groups and privacy advocates have raised concerns about the lack of transparency and the potential for mass surveillance without warrants.
What the Left Is Saying
Progressive advocates and privacy-focused Democrats have long criticized the expansion of ALPR networks like Flock. The ACLU and similar organizations argue that these systems enable warrantless tracking of citizens, creating a detailed map of movements that can be used for purposes beyond serious crime investigation. They contend that the technology disproportionately impacts marginalized communities and that the lack of clear regulatory frameworks allows for function creep, where data collected for traffic enforcement is used for minor infractions or political monitoring.
Supporters of the candidate’s stance within the progressive coalition view the ad campaign as a necessary pushback against the unchecked growth of surveillance capitalism and state power. They argue that voters are increasingly uncomfortable with the idea of their daily movements being recorded and stored in private databases, regardless of the stated intent for public safety.
What the Right Is Saying
Conservative commentators and law enforcement supporters often view Flock cameras as a pragmatic tool for reducing crime and protecting property rights. They argue that the technology allows police to quickly identify stolen vehicles and suspects in hit-and-run incidents, saving resources and enhancing public safety. Many Republican leaders in Montana have supported the adoption of these systems as part of a broader strategy to empower local law enforcement against criminal elements.
Critics of the candidate’s ad campaign from the right describe the "creepy" characterization as fear-mongering that ignores the tangible benefits of the technology. They argue that privacy concerns are overblown and that the alternative—less effective policing—results in higher crime rates. Some conservative voices suggest that the candidate is pandering to a niche activist base rather than addressing the primary concerns of rural and suburban voters who prioritize safety and property protection.
What the Numbers Show
Montana has been one of the most aggressive adopters of Flock Safety technology in the United States, with hundreds of cameras installed across the state, including in many small towns and rural counties. The company reports that its network has assisted in thousands of arrests and recovered hundreds of stolen vehicles nationwide since its inception. In Montana specifically, local police departments have cited the system’s role in solving cold cases and identifying vehicles involved in criminal activities.
However, independent analyses and legislative audits in various states have found that a significant majority of the vehicles captured by ALPR cameras are not involved in any crime. Data from other jurisdictions suggests that less than 1% of scanned vehicles are linked to active warrants or stolen status. This statistic fuels the debate on whether the scale of data collection is proportional to the security benefits provided.
The Bottom Line
This campaign ad highlights a growing ideological split within the Republican base and the broader conservative movement regarding the role of technology in governance. While traditional conservatives often support enhanced policing tools, a rising faction of libertarians and privacy-focused Republicans is pushing back against state surveillance, viewing it as an overreach that threatens individual liberty.
The reaction to the ad will serve as a bellwether for the 2026 Senate race in Montana. If the "privacy over security" message resonates with swing voters, it could force other candidates in the race to adopt similar stances or risk alienating a growing segment of the electorate concerned about digital rights. Watch for responses from the Montana Association of Chiefs of Police and national conservative groups, who will likely mobilize to counter the narrative that these cameras are intrusive rather than protective.